Enemies of Reason Poundshop potshots at the media moral maze.

16Sep/081

Mike Rudin goes baiting the whoop-whoops

I just realised that in a previous post I called them 'troofers', which is almost as if I'm legitimising the accursed Littlejohnian practice of taking the piss out of something by approximating it into mockney phonetics. So sorry about that, won't happen again. I bow my head in shame and self-flagellate; but then again that's what I tend to do at 5pm every day anyway. But, to clarify, from now on I'll call our friends in the tinfoil hats 'whoop-whoops' to avoid any confusion.

Anyway, read and enjoy the slew of comments that attach themselves like hungry piranhas to Mike Rudin's article, including delights such as:

Don't mention this organisation in any of your posts... They're censoring any submissions, I don't know why I'm sending this either, it will probably not be listed...

I'm guessing it's probably the antiquated libel laws, in fact. But I am all for free speech - let the truthers have their say.

I'm not saying there aren't such things as conspiracies, or even a military-industrial complex. I just think that trying to make out that 9-11 a conspiracy is bloody bonkers, and demeans any righteous attacks on secret government and vested interests.

Be Sociable, Share!

Related posts:

  1. Whoops, no try again
  2. Whoops a daisy
  3. Whoop-whoop nee-naw ding-ding-ding
  4. Lefty-baiting: an idiot’s guide
Comments (1) Trackbacks (0)
  1. Well said. If we want to go after genuine conspirators (e.g. those who fabricated the WMD ‘evidence’), the last thing we need are crackpot conspiracy theories.

    By the way, creationists (among whom are many British teachers, thanks to Tony Blair) often portray evolution as something close to an atheist conspiracy, which must then involve hundreds of thousands of scientists from various disciplines all hiding the ‘truth’. In comparison, 9/11 truthers suppose a conspiracy of moderate size.


Leave a comment


No trackbacks yet.